datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · date: may 10, 2016 thomas...

34

Upload: doannguyet

Post on 19-Mar-2018

223 views

Category:

Documents


5 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance
Page 2: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Date: May 10, 2016

Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and CompanyCrown Castle 250 E. Broad Street, Suite 6001500 Corporate Drive Columbus, OH 43215Canonsburg, PA 15317 614.221.6679724.416.2939 [email protected]

Subject: Structural Analysis Report

Carrier Designation: T-Mobile Co-LocateCarrier Site Number: A6C0137ACarrier Site Name: N. Riverside/Dublin HS

Crown Castle Designation: Crown Castle BU Number: 826150Crown Castle Site Name: N. Riverside / Dublin HSCrown Castle JDE Job Number: 376251Crown Castle Work Order Number: 1233620Crown Castle Application Number: 345244 Rev. 0

Engineering Firm Designation: Paul J. Ford and Company Project Number: 37516-1466.001.7805

Site Data: 4000 Hard Rd, Dublin, Franklin County, OHLatitude 40° 7' 25.58'', Longitude -83° 5' 48.12''150.75 Foot - Monopole Tower

Dear Thomas Simpkins,

Paul J. Ford and Company is pleased to submit this “Structural Analysis Report” to determine the structuralintegrity of the above mentioned tower. This analysis has been performed in accordance with the Crown CastleStructural ‘Statement of Work’ and the terms of Crown Castle Purchase Order Number 901025, in accordancewith application 345244, revision 0.

The purpose of the analysis is to determine acceptability of the tower stress level. Based on our analysis wehave determined the tower stress level for the structure and foundation, under the following load case, to be:

LC7: Existing + Reserved + Proposed Equipment Sufficient CapacityNote: See Table I and Table II for the proposed and existing/reserved loading, respectively.

The analysis has been performed in accordance with the TIA-222-G Standard based upon a wind speed of 90mph 3-second gust, exposure category C as allowed per Section 3108 of the 2011 Ohio Building Code.

We at Paul J. Ford and Company appreciate the opportunity of providing our continuing professional services toyou and Crown Castle. If you have any questions or need further assistance on this or any other projectsplease give us a call.

Respectfully submitted by:

Joey Meinerding, E.I.Structural Designer

Page 3: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 2

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1) INTRODUCTION

2) ANALYSIS CRITERIATable 1 - Proposed Antenna and Cable InformationTable 2 - Existing and Reserved Antenna and Cable Information

3) ANALYSIS PROCEDURETable 3 - Documents Provided3.1) Analysis Method3.2) Assumptions

4) ANALYSIS RESULTSTable 4 – Section Capacity (Summary)Table 5 – Tower Component Stresses vs. Capacity4.1) Recommendations

5) APPENDIX AtnxTower Output

6) APPENDIX BBase Level Drawing

7) APPENDIX CAdditional Calculations

Page 4: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 3

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

1) INTRODUCTION

This tower is a 150.75 ft. monopole tower mapped by TEP in September of 2011. The original design standardand wind speed are unknown.

2) ANALYSIS CRITERIA

The analysis has been performed in accordance with the TIA-222-G Standard based upon a wind speed of 90mph 3-second gust, exposure category C as allowed per Section 3108 of the 2011 Ohio Building Code.

Table 1 - Proposed Antenna and Cable Information

MountingLevel (ft)

CenterLine

Elevation(ft)

Numberof

Antennas

AntennaManufacturer

Antenna ModelNumberof FeedLines

FeedLine

Size (in)Note

151.0 153.03 andrew

DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/Mount Pipe 1 1-3/5 --

3 nokia FRLB

Page 5: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 4

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Table 2 - Existing and Reserved Antenna and Cable Information

MountingLevel (ft)

CenterLine

Elevation(ft)

Numberof

Antennas

AntennaManufacturer

Antenna ModelNumberof FeedLines

FeedLine

Size (in)Note

151.0

156.01 decibel DB810M-XC 1

11

1/27/8

1-1/41

1 telewave TTPA-8626

153.0

3cellmax

technologiesCMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6 w/

Mount Pipe -- -- 3

6 rfs celwave ATMAP1412D-1A20

6cellmax

technologiesCMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6 w/

Mount Pipe

118

1-1/41-5/8

1151.0

3 nokia FRIG

3 nokia FXFB

1 raycap DC4-48-60-8-20F

1 tower mounts Platform Mount [LP 601-1]

1 tower mounts Side Arm Mount [SO 702-1]

146.0 1 decibel DB810M-XC

136.0 136.0

3 alcatel lucent RRH2X40-07-U

15 1-5/8 2

3 alcatel lucentRRH2X60-850 (3GPP BAND

5)

3 alcatel lucentRRH2X60-AWS BAND 4-R

W/BRACKET

3 alcatel lucent RRH4x30

12quintel

technologyQS8658-2

3 raycap RCMDC-3315-PF-48

1 tower mounts Platform Mount [LP 301-1]

132.0 132.0 1 tower mounts Platform Mount [LP 601-1] -- -- 3

90.5 90.57 generic 18"Ø Stadium Lights

-- -- 11 tower mounts T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1]

88.0 88.07 generic 18"Ø Stadium Lights 3

41/43/8

11 tower mounts T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1]

85.5 85.57 generic 18"Ø Stadium Lights

-- -- 11 tower mounts T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1]

Notes:1) Existing Equipment2) Reserved Equipment3) Equipment To Be Removed

Page 6: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 5

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

3) ANALYSIS PROCEDURE

Table 3 - Documents Provided

Document Remarks Reference Source

4-GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS TEP, 113265.10, 09/22/2011 3486717 CCISITES

4-TOWER FOUNDATIONDRAWINGS/DESIGN/SPECS

GPD, 2016777.826150.02,03/08/2016 (Mapping)

6129619 CCISITES

4-TOWER MANUFACTURERDRAWINGS

TEP, 113265, 09/15/2011(Mapping)

3773012 CCISITES

4-POST-MODIFICATIONINSPECTION

TEP, 36942, 04/01/2016 6193826 CCISITES

3.1) Analysis Method

tnxTower (version 7.0.5.1), a commercially available analysis software package, was used to create athree-dimensional model of the tower and calculate member stresses for various loading cases.Selected output from the analysis is included in Appendix A.

3.2) Assumptions

1) Tower and structures were built in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications.2) The tower and structures have been maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s

specification.3) The configuration of antennas, transmission cables, mounts and other appurtenances are as

specified in Tables 1 and 2 and the referenced drawings.4) The monopole manufacturer drawings are not available at the time of this analysis. Therefore,

we have assumed pole shaft and base plate steel yield strength(s) (Fy) as shown in theattached calculations. Anchor rods are assumed to be ASTM A615 #18J, 2.25" diam, (Fu = 100ksi, Fy = 75 ksi).

5) Soil parameters that were used are from an email between Crown Castle and GPD.6) For existing modifications: monopole was modified in conformance with the referenced

modification drawings.

This analysis may be affected if any assumptions are not valid or have been made in error. Paul J.Ford and Company should be notified to determine the effect on the structural integrity of the tower.

Page 7: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 6

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

4) ANALYSIS RESULTS

Table 4 - Section Capacity (Summary)

SectionNo.

Elevation (ft)Component

TypeSize

CriticalElement

P (K)SF*P_allow

(K)%

CapacityPass / Fail

L1 150.75 - 124.25 Pole TP21.27x14.18x0.1875 1 -6.91 820.95 80.5 Pass

L2 124.25 - 82.5 Pole TP29.77x20.1592x0.3125 2 -14.18 1948.69 89.1 Pass

L3 82.5 - 40.67 Pole TP37.57x28.3351x0.375 3 -23.94 2957.57 90.5 Pass

L4 40.67 - 0 Pole TP43.24x35.8576x0.4375 4 -37.89 4076.16 89.2 Pass

Summary

Pole (L3) 90.5 Pass

Rating = 90.5 Pass

Table 5 - Tower Component Stresses vs. Capacity

Notes Component Elevation (ft) % Capacity Pass / Fail

1 Anchor Rods 0 76.9 Pass

1 Base Plate 0 90.7 Pass

1Base FoundationStructural Steel

0 89.0 Pass

1Base FoundationSoil Interaction

0 92.2 Pass

Structure Rating (max from all components) = 92.2%

Notes:1) See additional documentation in “Appendix C – Additional Calculations” for calculations supporting the % capacity

consumed.

4.1) Recommendations

The monopole and its foundation have sufficient capacity to carry the existing, reserved, andproposed loads. No modifications are required at this time.

Page 8: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 7

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

APPENDIX A

TNXTOWER OUTPUT

Page 9: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 8

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Tower Input Data

There is a pole section.This tower is designed using the TIA-222-G standard.The following design criteria apply:

1) Tower is located in Franklin County, Ohio.2) Basic wind speed of 90 mph.3) Structure Class II.4) Exposure Category C.5) Topographic Category 1.6) Crest Height 0.00 ft.7) Nominal ice thickness of 0.7500 in.8) Ice thickness is considered to increase with height.9) Ice density of 56 pcf.10) A wind speed of 40 mph is used in combination with ice.11) Temperature drop of 50 °F.12) Deflections calculated using a wind speed of 60 mph.13) A non-linear (P-delta) analysis was used.14) Pressures are calculated at each section.15) Stress ratio used in pole design is 1.16) Local bending stresses due to climbing loads, feed line supports, and appurtenance mounts are

not considered.

Options

Consider Moments - Legs Distribute Leg Loads As Uniform Use ASCE 10 X-Brace Ly RulesConsider Moments - Horizontals Assume Legs Pinned Calculate Redundant Bracing Forces

Consider Moments - Diagonals √ Assume Rigid Index Plate Ignore Redundant Members in FEA Use Moment Magnification √ Use Clear Spans For Wind Area SR Leg Bolts Resist Compression √ Use Code Stress Ratios Use Clear Spans For KL/r All Leg Panels Have Same Allowable √ Use Code Safety Factors - Guys Retension Guys To Initial Tension Offset Girt At Foundation Escalate Ice √ Bypass Mast Stability Checks √ Consider Feed Line Torque Always Use Max Kz √ Use Azimuth Dish Coefficients Include Angle Block Shear Check Use Special Wind Profile √ Project Wind Area of Appurt. Use TIA-222-G Bracing Resist.

ExemptionInclude Bolts In Member Capacity Autocalc Torque Arm Areas Use TIA-222-G Tension Splice

ExemptionLeg Bolts Are At Top Of Section Add IBC .6D+W Combination Poles

Secondary Horizontal Braces Leg Sort Capacity Reports By Component √ Include Shear-Torsion Interaction Use Diamond Inner Bracing (4 Sided) Triangulate Diamond Inner Bracing Always Use Sub-Critical FlowSR Members Have Cut Ends Treat Feed Line Bundles As Cylinder Use Top Mounted SocketsSR Members Are Concentric

Tapered Pole Section Geometry

Section Elevation

ft

SectionLength

ft

SpliceLength

ft

Numberof

Sides

TopDiameter

in

BottomDiameter

in

WallThickness

in

BendRadius

in

Pole Grade

L1 150.75-124.25 26.50 2.75 18 14.1800 21.2700 0.1875 0.7500 A572-60(60 ksi)

L2 124.25-82.50 44.50 3.75 18 20.1592 29.7700 0.3125 1.2500 A572-60(60 ksi)

L3 82.50-40.67 45.58 4.75 18 28.3351 37.5700 0.3750 1.5000 A572-60(60 ksi)

L4 40.67-0.00 45.42 18 35.8576 43.2400 0.4375 1.7500 A572-60(60 ksi)

Page 10: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 9

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Tapered Pole Properties

Section Tip Dia.in

Areain2

Iin4

rin

Cin

I/Cin3

Jin4

It/Qin2

win

w/t

L1 14.3987 8.3273 205.9831 4.9673 7.2034 28.5951 412.2372 4.1644 2.1657 11.5521.5981 12.5467 704.5502 7.4843 10.8052 65.2050 1410.0276 6.2746 3.4135 18.205

L2 21.0733 19.6855 979.6304 7.0456 10.2409 95.6587 1960.5499 9.8446 2.9980 9.59430.2293 29.2182 3203.1852 10.4574 15.1232 211.8066 6410.5853 14.6119 4.6895 15.006

L3 29.5437 33.2795 3286.9420 9.9258 14.3942 228.3513 6578.2089 16.6429 4.3270 11.53938.1496 44.2713 7738.0108 13.2042 19.0856 405.4380 15486.203

422.1399 5.9523 15.873

L4 37.1947 49.1853 7796.0057 12.5741 18.2157 427.9836 15602.2695

24.5973 5.5409 12.665

43.9070 59.4366 13757.1932

15.1949 21.9659 626.2972 27532.4886

29.7240 6.8402 15.635

TowerElevation

ft

GussetArea

(per face)

ft2

GussetThickness

in

Gusset GradeAdjust. FactorAf

Adjust.Factor

Ar

Weight Mult. Double AngleStitch BoltSpacing

Diagonalsin

Double AngleStitch BoltSpacing

Horizontalsin

Double AngleStitch BoltSpacing

Redundantsin

L1 150.75-124.25

1 1 1

L2 124.25-82.50

1 1 1

L3 82.50-40.67

1 1 1

L4 40.67-0.00 1 1 1

Feed Line/Linear Appurtenances - Entered As Area

Description Faceor

Leg

AllowShield

ComponentType

Placement

ft

TotalNumber

CAAA

ft2/ft

Weight

plf

LDF4-50A(1/2'') C No Inside Pole 150.75 - 0.00 1 No Ice1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

0.150.150.15

LDF5-50A(7/8'') C No Inside Pole 150.75 - 0.00 1 No Ice1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

0.330.330.33

LDF6-50A(1-1/4'') C No Inside Pole 150.75 - 0.00 1 No Ice1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

0.660.660.66

LDF6-50A(1-1/4'') C No Inside Pole 150.75 - 0.00 1 No Ice1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

0.660.660.66

LDF7-50A(1-5/8'') C No Inside Pole 150.75 - 0.00 18 No Ice1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

0.820.820.82

ASU9325TYP01(1-3/5'')

C No Inside Pole 150.75 - 0.00 1 No Ice1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

1.611.611.61

***LDF7-50A(1-5/8'') C No Inside Pole 136.00 - 0.00 12 No Ice

1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

0.820.820.82

HB158-1-08U8-S8J18(1-5/8'')

C No Inside Pole 136.00 - 0.00 3 No Ice1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

1.301.301.30

***LDF1-50A(1/4'') C No Inside Pole 88.00 - 0.00 3 No Ice

1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

0.060.060.06

LDF2-50(3/8'') C No Inside Pole 88.00 - 0.00 4 No Ice1/2'' Ice1'' Ice

0.000.000.00

0.080.080.08

Page 11: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 10

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Feed Line/Linear Appurtenances Section Areas

TowerSectio

n

TowerElevation

ft

Face AR

ft2

AF

ft2

CAAA

In Faceft2

CAAA

Out Faceft2

Weight

K

L1 150.75-124.25 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.000.000.64

L2 124.25-82.50 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.000.001.34

L3 82.50-40.67 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.000.001.36

L4 40.67-0.00 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.000.001.32

Feed Line/Linear Appurtenances Section Areas - With Ice

TowerSectio

n

TowerElevation

ft

Faceor

Leg

IceThickness

in

AR

ft2

AF

ft2

CAAA

In Faceft2

CAAA

Out Faceft2

Weight

K

L1 150.75-124.25 ABC

1.729 0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.000.000.64

L2 124.25-82.50 ABC

1.680 0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.000.001.34

L3 82.50-40.67 ABC

1.595 0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.000.001.36

L4 40.67-0.00 ABC

1.430 0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

0.000.001.32

Feed Line Center of Pressure

Section Elevation

ft

CPX

in

CPZ

in

CPX

Icein

CPZ

Icein

L1 150.75-124.25 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000L2 124.25-82.50 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000L3 82.50-40.67 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000L4 40.67-0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Shielding Factor Ka

TowerSection

Feed LineRecord No.

Description Feed LineSegment

Elev.

Ka

No IceKa

Ice

Discrete Tower Loads

Page 12: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 11

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Description Faceor

Leg

OffsetType

Offsets:Horz

LateralVert

ftftft

AzimuthAdjustmen

t

°

Placement

ft

CAAA

Front

ft2

CAAA

Side

ft2

Weight

K

DB810M-XC C From Leg 4.000.005.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.123.144.18

2.123.144.18

0.030.050.07

DB810M-XC C From Leg 4.000.00-5.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.123.144.18

2.123.144.18

0.030.050.07

TTPA-8626 C From Leg 4.000.005.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.071.201.35

0.800.931.06

0.020.030.04

(2) CMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6w/ Mount Pipe

A From Leg 4.000.002.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

11.9512.5213.08

7.308.479.41

0.140.230.34

(2) CMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6w/ Mount Pipe

B From Leg 4.000.002.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

11.9512.5213.08

7.308.479.41

0.140.230.34

(2) CMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6w/ Mount Pipe

C From Leg 4.000.002.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

11.9512.5213.08

7.308.479.41

0.140.230.34

FXFB A From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

0.840.981.13

0.961.121.28

0.060.080.10

FXFB B From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

0.840.981.13

0.961.121.28

0.060.080.10

FXFB C From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

0.840.981.13

0.961.121.28

0.060.080.10

FRIG A From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.392.592.79

0.971.101.25

0.060.070.09

FRIG B From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.392.592.79

0.971.101.25

0.060.070.09

FRIG C From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.392.592.79

0.971.101.25

0.060.070.09

DC4-48-60-8-20F C From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.431.581.74

0.590.700.81

0.010.020.03

DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/Mount Pipe

A From Leg 4.000.002.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

8.418.979.50

7.088.279.18

0.070.140.22

DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/Mount Pipe

B From Leg 4.000.002.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

8.418.979.50

7.088.279.18

0.070.140.22

DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/Mount Pipe

C From Leg 4.000.002.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

8.418.979.50

7.088.279.18

0.070.140.22

FRLB A From Leg 4.00 0.000 151.00 No Ice 2.07 0.78 0.06

Page 13: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 12

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Description Faceor

Leg

OffsetType

Offsets:Horz

LateralVert

ftftft

AzimuthAdjustmen

t

°

Placement

ft

CAAA

Front

ft2

CAAA

Side

ft2

Weight

K

0.002.00

1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.252.43

0.901.03

0.070.09

FRLB B From Leg 4.000.002.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.072.252.43

0.780.901.03

0.060.070.09

FRLB C From Leg 4.000.002.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.072.252.43

0.780.901.03

0.060.070.09

2.375'' OD x 5' Mount Pipe A From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.191.501.81

1.191.501.81

0.020.030.04

2.375'' OD x 5' Mount Pipe B From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.191.501.81

1.191.501.81

0.020.030.04

2.375'' OD x 5' Mount Pipe C From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.191.501.81

1.191.501.81

0.020.030.04

8-ft Ladder C From Leg 2.000.00-2.00

0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

7.079.7311.19

7.079.7311.19

0.040.070.08

Side Arm Mount [SO 702-1]

C None 0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.001.001.00

1.432.052.67

0.030.040.05

Platform Mount [LP 601-1] C None 0.000 151.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

28.4733.5938.71

28.4733.5938.71

1.121.511.91

***(4) QS8658-2 A From Leg 4.00

0.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

11.5812.1912.80

9.059.6410.24

0.120.190.27

(4) QS8658-2 B From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

11.5812.1912.80

9.059.6410.24

0.120.190.27

(4) QS8658-2 C From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

11.5812.1912.80

9.059.6410.24

0.120.190.27

RRH2X60-850 (3GPPBAND 5)

A From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.811.992.17

1.431.581.75

0.050.070.09

RRH2X60-850 (3GPPBAND 5)

B From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.811.992.17

1.431.581.75

0.050.070.09

RRH2X60-850 (3GPPBAND 5)

C From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.811.992.17

1.431.581.75

0.050.070.09

RRH2X40-07-U A From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.932.102.28

1.051.191.33

0.050.070.09

RRH2X40-07-U B From Leg 4.00 0.000 136.00 No Ice 1.93 1.05 0.05

Page 14: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 13

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Description Faceor

Leg

OffsetType

Offsets:Horz

LateralVert

ftftft

AzimuthAdjustmen

t

°

Placement

ft

CAAA

Front

ft2

CAAA

Side

ft2

Weight

K

0.000.00

1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.102.28

1.191.33

0.070.09

RRH2X40-07-U C From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

1.932.102.28

1.051.191.33

0.050.070.09

(3) RRH2X60-AWS BAND4-R W/BRACKET

A From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

3.363.613.88

2.002.242.48

0.060.080.11

(3) RRH4x30 A From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

3.503.764.03

1.822.052.29

0.060.080.10

(2) RCMDC-3315-PF-48 A From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

3.713.954.20

2.192.392.61

0.030.060.10

RCMDC-3315-PF-48 B From Leg 4.000.000.00

0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

3.713.954.20

2.192.392.61

0.030.060.10

Platform Mount [LP 301-1] C None 0.000 136.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

30.1040.8051.50

30.1040.8051.50

1.592.032.47

******

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.00-7.000.00

0.000 90.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.00-4.670.00

0.000 90.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.00-2.330.00

0.000 90.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.000.000.00

0.000 90.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.002.330.00

0.000 90.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.004.670.00

0.000 90.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.007.000.00

0.000 90.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1] C None 0.000 90.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

7.289.5211.76

3.024.205.38

0.260.330.40

***18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.00

-7.000.00

0.000 88.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

Page 15: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 14

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Description Faceor

Leg

OffsetType

Offsets:Horz

LateralVert

ftftft

AzimuthAdjustmen

t

°

Placement

ft

CAAA

Front

ft2

CAAA

Side

ft2

Weight

K

1'' Ice18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.00

-4.670.00

0.000 88.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.00-2.330.00

0.000 88.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.000.000.00

0.000 88.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.002.330.00

0.000 88.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.004.670.00

0.000 88.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.007.000.00

0.000 88.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1] C None 0.000 88.00 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

7.289.5211.76

3.024.205.38

0.260.330.40

***18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.00

-7.000.00

0.000 85.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.00-4.670.00

0.000 85.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.00-2.330.00

0.000 85.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.000.000.00

0.000 85.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.002.330.00

0.000 85.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.004.670.00

0.000 85.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

18''Ø Stadium Lights C From Leg 1.007.000.00

0.000 85.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

2.743.053.36

0.830.921.01

0.020.030.04

T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1] C None 0.000 85.50 No Ice1/2''Ice

1'' Ice

7.289.5211.76

3.024.205.38

0.260.330.40

Page 16: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 15

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Tower Pressures - No Ice

GH = 1.100

SectionElevation

ft

z

ft

KZ qz

psf

AG

ft2

Face

AF

ft2

AR

ft2

Aleg

ft2

Leg%

CAAA

InFace

ft2

CAAA

OutFace

ft2

L1 150.75-124.25

136.62 1.352 26.62 39.747 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

39.74739.74739.747

39.747 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

L2 124.25-82.50

102.35 1.272 25.02 89.245 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

89.24589.24589.245

89.245 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

L3 82.50-40.67

61.08 1.141 22.39 117.984

ABC

0.0000.0000.000

117.984117.984117.984

117.984 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

L4 40.67-0.00 20.52 0.907 18.02 137.434

ABC

0.0000.0000.000

137.434137.434137.434

137.434 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

Tower Pressure - With Ice

GH = 1.100

SectionElevation

ft

z

ft

KZ qz

psf

tZ

in

AG

ft2

Face

AF

ft2

AR

ft2

Aleg

ft2

Leg%

CAAA

InFace

ft2

CAAA

OutFace

ft2

L1 150.75-124.25

136.62 1.352 5.26 1.7290 47.383 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

47.38347.38347.383

47.383 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

L2 124.25-82.50

102.35 1.272 4.94 1.6798 101.276 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

101.276101.276101.276

101.276 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

L3 82.50-40.67 61.08 1.141 4.42 1.5952 129.695 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

129.695129.695129.695

129.695 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

L4 40.67-0.00 20.52 0.907 3.56 1.4304 148.247 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

148.247148.247148.247

148.247 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

Tower Pressure - Service

GH = 1.100

SectionElevation

ft

z

ft

KZ qz

psf

AG

ft2

Face

AF

ft2

AR

ft2

Aleg

ft2

Leg%

CAAA

InFace

ft2

CAAA

OutFace

ft2

L1 150.75-124.25

136.62 1.352 10.59 39.747 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

39.74739.74739.747

39.747 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

L2 124.25-82.50

102.35 1.272 9.95 89.245 ABC

0.0000.0000.000

89.24589.24589.245

89.245 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

L3 82.50-40.67

61.08 1.141 8.90 117.984

ABC

0.0000.0000.000

117.984117.984117.984

117.984 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

L4 40.67-0.00 20.52 0.907 7.16 137.434

ABC

0.0000.0000.000

137.434137.434137.434

137.434 100.00100.00100.00

0.0000.0000.000

0.0000.0000.000

Page 17: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 16

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Load Combinations

Comb.No.

Description

1 Dead Only2 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg - No Ice3 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg - No Ice4 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 30 deg - No Ice5 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 30 deg - No Ice6 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 60 deg - No Ice7 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 60 deg - No Ice8 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg - No Ice9 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg - No Ice10 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 120 deg - No Ice11 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 120 deg - No Ice12 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 150 deg - No Ice13 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 150 deg - No Ice14 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg - No Ice15 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg - No Ice16 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 210 deg - No Ice17 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 210 deg - No Ice18 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 240 deg - No Ice19 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 240 deg - No Ice20 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 270 deg - No Ice21 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 270 deg - No Ice22 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 300 deg - No Ice23 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 300 deg - No Ice24 1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 330 deg - No Ice25 0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 330 deg - No Ice26 1.2 Dead+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp27 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 0 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp28 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 30 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp29 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 60 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp30 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 90 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp31 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 120 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp32 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 150 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp33 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 180 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp34 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 210 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp35 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 240 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp36 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 270 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp37 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 300 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp38 1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 330 deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp39 Dead+Wind 0 deg - Service40 Dead+Wind 30 deg - Service41 Dead+Wind 60 deg - Service42 Dead+Wind 90 deg - Service43 Dead+Wind 120 deg - Service44 Dead+Wind 150 deg - Service45 Dead+Wind 180 deg - Service46 Dead+Wind 210 deg - Service47 Dead+Wind 240 deg - Service48 Dead+Wind 270 deg - Service49 Dead+Wind 300 deg - Service50 Dead+Wind 330 deg - Service

Maximum Member Forces

Section

No.

Elevationft

ComponentType

Condition Gov.Load

Comb.

Axial

K

Major AxisMoment

kip-ft

Minor AxisMoment

kip-ft

L1 150.75 -124.25

Pole Max Tension 1 0.00 0.00 0.00

Max. Compression 26 -22.65 1.27 5.29Max. Mx 20 -7.00 267.64 1.23Max. My 2 -6.91 -0.38 272.49Max. Vy 20 -16.34 267.64 1.23Max. Vx 2 -16.75 -0.38 272.49

Page 18: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 17

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Section

No.

Elevationft

ComponentType

Condition Gov.Load

Comb.

Axial

K

Major AxisMoment

kip-ft

Minor AxisMoment

kip-ft

Max. Torque 24 2.21L2 124.25 -

82.5Pole Max Tension 1 0.00 0.00 0.00

Max. Compression 26 -32.62 3.12 5.00Max. Mx 20 -14.16 992.35 -1.18Max. My 2 -14.18 -1.88 1010.87Max. Vy 20 -20.97 992.35 -1.18Max. Vx 14 20.80 3.88 -1007.60

Max. Torque 4 2.64L3 82.5 - 40.67 Pole Max Tension 1 0.00 0.00 0.00

Max. Compression 26 -44.98 4.12 4.84Max. Mx 20 -23.98 1942.67 -32.47Max. My 2 -24.01 -32.68 1942.11Max. Vy 20 -24.49 1942.67 -32.47Max. Vx 14 24.03 35.46 -1939.28

Max. Torque 2 3.01L4 40.67 - 0 Pole Max Tension 1 0.00 0.00 0.00

Max. Compression 26 -61.31 4.15 4.86Max. Mx 20 -37.89 3105.46 -66.80Max. My 2 -37.89 -67.01 3083.86Max. Vy 8 26.45 -3102.73 70.05Max. Vx 14 25.99 69.82 -3081.17

Max. Torque 2 2.99

Maximum Reactions

Location Condition Gov.Load

Comb.

VerticalK

Horizontal, XK

Horizontal, ZK

Pole Max. Vert 26 61.31 -0.00 -0.00Max. Hx 20 37.92 26.40 -0.74Max. Hz 3 28.44 -0.74 25.94Max. Mx 2 3083.86 -0.74 25.94Max. Mz 8 3102.73 -26.40 0.74

Max. Torsion 2 2.98 -0.74 25.94Min. Vert 3 28.44 -0.74 25.94Min. Hx 8 37.92 -26.40 0.74Min. Hz 15 28.44 0.74 -25.94Min. Mx 14 -3081.17 0.74 -25.94Min. Mz 20 -3105.46 26.40 -0.74

Min. Torsion 14 -2.89 0.74 -25.94

Tower Mast Reaction Summary

LoadCombination

Vertical

K

Shearx

K

Shearz

K

OverturningMoment, Mx

kip-ft

OverturningMoment, Mz

kip-ft

Torque

kip-ft

Dead Only 31.60 0.00 0.00 -1.17 1.09 -0.001.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg -No Ice

37.92 0.74 -25.94 -3083.86 -67.02 -2.98

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 0 deg -No Ice

28.44 0.74 -25.94 -3030.94 -66.57 -2.94

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 30 deg -No Ice

37.92 13.84 -22.84 -2705.47 -1609.80 -2.89

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 30 deg -No Ice

28.44 13.84 -22.84 -2658.95 -1583.15 -2.87

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 60 deg -No Ice

37.92 23.24 -13.61 -1602.23 -2720.92 -2.01

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 60 deg -No Ice

28.44 23.24 -13.61 -1574.71 -2675.30 -2.01

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg - 37.92 26.40 -0.74 -70.05 -3102.73 -0.60

Page 19: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 18

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

LoadCombination

Vertical

K

Shearx

K

Shearz

K

OverturningMoment, Mx

kip-ft

OverturningMoment, Mz

kip-ft

Torque

kip-ft

No Ice0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 90 deg -No Ice

28.44 26.40 -0.74 -68.77 -3050.42 -0.62

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 120 deg- No Ice

37.92 22.50 12.33 1480.83 -2653.11 0.94

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 120 deg- No Ice

28.44 22.50 12.33 1455.60 -2608.27 0.91

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 150 deg- No Ice

37.92 12.56 22.10 2634.43 -1491.64 2.21

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 150 deg- No Ice

28.44 12.56 22.10 2589.59 -1466.39 2.17

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg- No Ice

37.92 -0.74 25.94 3081.17 69.82 2.89

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 180 deg- No Ice

28.44 -0.74 25.94 3028.95 68.63 2.86

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 210 deg- No Ice

37.92 -13.84 22.84 2702.31 1612.64 2.83

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 210 deg- No Ice

28.44 -13.84 22.84 2656.67 1585.22 2.81

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 240 deg- No Ice

37.92 -23.24 13.61 1599.05 2723.81 2.03

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 240 deg- No Ice

28.44 -23.24 13.61 1572.41 2677.41 2.03

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 270 deg- No Ice

37.92 -26.40 0.74 66.80 3105.46 0.68

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 270 deg- No Ice

28.44 -26.40 0.74 66.43 3052.34 0.70

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 300 deg- No Ice

37.92 -22.50 -12.33 -1484.12 2655.97 -0.88

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 300 deg- No Ice

28.44 -22.50 -12.33 -1457.98 2610.36 -0.85

1.2 Dead+1.6 Wind 330 deg- No Ice

37.92 -12.56 -22.10 -2637.70 1494.45 -2.23

0.9 Dead+1.6 Wind 330 deg- No Ice

28.44 -12.56 -22.10 -2591.95 1468.44 -2.20

1.2 Dead+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp 61.31 0.00 0.00 -4.86 4.15 -0.001.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 0deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 0.13 -5.64 -704.80 -7.98 -0.75

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 30deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 2.97 -4.95 -617.14 -358.12 -0.71

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 60deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 5.02 -2.93 -365.47 -611.16 -0.47

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 90deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 5.72 -0.13 -17.20 -699.32 -0.11

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 120deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 4.89 2.71 334.35 -598.96 0.28

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 150deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 2.75 4.82 594.97 -336.97 0.59

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 180deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 -0.13 5.64 694.84 16.45 0.74

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 210deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 -2.97 4.95 607.19 366.60 0.70

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 240deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 -5.02 2.93 355.51 619.65 0.46

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 270deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 -5.72 0.13 7.23 707.80 0.10

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 300deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 -4.89 -2.71 -344.32 607.44 -0.28

1.2 Dead+1.0 Wind 330deg+1.0 Ice+1.0 Temp

61.31 -2.75 -4.82 -604.94 345.44 -0.60

Dead+Wind 0 deg - Service 31.60 0.18 -6.45 -762.32 -15.70 -0.75Dead+Wind 30 deg - Service 31.60 3.44 -5.68 -668.82 -396.53 -0.74Dead+Wind 60 deg - Service 31.60 5.77 -3.38 -396.48 -670.80 -0.52Dead+Wind 90 deg - Service 31.60 6.56 -0.18 -18.28 -765.01 -0.17Dead+Wind 120 deg -Service

31.60 5.59 3.06 364.47 -653.91 0.23

Dead+Wind 150 deg -Service

31.60 3.12 5.49 649.18 -367.26 0.56

Dead+Wind 180 deg - 31.60 -0.18 6.45 759.58 18.11 0.75

Page 20: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 19

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

LoadCombination

Vertical

K

Shearx

K

Shearz

K

OverturningMoment, Mx

kip-ft

OverturningMoment, Mz

kip-ft

Torque

kip-ft

ServiceDead+Wind 210 deg -Service

31.60 -3.44 5.68 666.08 398.95 0.73

Dead+Wind 240 deg -Service

31.60 -5.77 3.38 393.74 673.22 0.52

Dead+Wind 270 deg -Service

31.60 -6.56 0.18 15.53 767.43 0.17

Dead+Wind 300 deg -Service

31.60 -5.59 -3.06 -367.21 656.32 -0.22

Dead+Wind 330 deg -Service

31.60 -3.12 -5.49 -651.93 369.68 -0.56

Solution Summary

LoadComb.

Sum of Applied Forces Sum of Reactions% ErrorPX

KPYK

PZK

PXK

PYK

PZK

1 0.00 -31.60 0.00 -0.00 31.60 -0.00 0.004%2 0.74 -37.92 -25.95 -0.74 37.92 25.94 0.012%3 0.74 -28.44 -25.95 -0.74 28.44 25.94 0.009%4 13.84 -37.92 -22.84 -13.84 37.92 22.84 0.000%5 13.84 -28.44 -22.84 -13.84 28.44 22.84 0.000%6 23.24 -37.92 -13.61 -23.24 37.92 13.61 0.000%7 23.24 -28.44 -13.61 -23.24 28.44 13.61 0.000%8 26.40 -37.92 -0.74 -26.40 37.92 0.74 0.004%9 26.40 -28.44 -0.74 -26.40 28.44 0.74 0.005%10 22.50 -37.92 12.33 -22.50 37.92 -12.33 0.000%11 22.50 -28.44 12.33 -22.50 28.44 -12.33 0.000%12 12.56 -37.92 22.10 -12.56 37.92 -22.10 0.000%13 12.56 -28.44 22.10 -12.56 28.44 -22.10 0.000%14 -0.74 -37.92 25.95 0.74 37.92 -25.94 0.004%15 -0.74 -28.44 25.95 0.74 28.44 -25.94 0.003%16 -13.84 -37.92 22.84 13.84 37.92 -22.84 0.000%17 -13.84 -28.44 22.84 13.84 28.44 -22.84 0.000%18 -23.24 -37.92 13.61 23.24 37.92 -13.61 0.000%19 -23.24 -28.44 13.61 23.24 28.44 -13.61 0.000%20 -26.40 -37.92 0.74 26.40 37.92 -0.74 0.007%21 -26.40 -28.44 0.74 26.40 28.44 -0.74 0.009%22 -22.50 -37.92 -12.33 22.50 37.92 12.33 0.000%23 -22.50 -28.44 -12.33 22.50 28.44 12.33 0.000%24 -12.56 -37.92 -22.10 12.56 37.92 22.10 0.000%25 -12.56 -28.44 -22.10 12.56 28.44 22.10 0.000%26 0.00 -61.31 0.00 -0.00 61.31 -0.00 0.001%27 0.13 -61.31 -5.64 -0.13 61.31 5.64 0.002%28 2.97 -61.31 -4.95 -2.97 61.31 4.95 0.002%29 5.02 -61.31 -2.93 -5.02 61.31 2.93 0.002%30 5.72 -61.31 -0.13 -5.72 61.31 0.13 0.002%31 4.89 -61.31 2.71 -4.89 61.31 -2.71 0.002%32 2.75 -61.31 4.82 -2.75 61.31 -4.82 0.002%33 -0.13 -61.31 5.64 0.13 61.31 -5.64 0.002%34 -2.97 -61.31 4.95 2.97 61.31 -4.95 0.002%35 -5.02 -61.31 2.93 5.02 61.31 -2.93 0.002%36 -5.72 -61.31 0.13 5.72 61.31 -0.13 0.002%37 -4.89 -61.31 -2.71 4.89 61.31 2.71 0.002%38 -2.75 -61.31 -4.82 2.75 61.31 4.82 0.002%39 0.18 -31.60 -6.45 -0.18 31.60 6.45 0.004%40 3.44 -31.60 -5.68 -3.44 31.60 5.68 0.004%41 5.77 -31.60 -3.38 -5.77 31.60 3.38 0.004%42 6.56 -31.60 -0.18 -6.56 31.60 0.18 0.004%43 5.59 -31.60 3.06 -5.59 31.60 -3.06 0.004%44 3.12 -31.60 5.49 -3.12 31.60 -5.49 0.004%45 -0.18 -31.60 6.45 0.18 31.60 -6.45 0.004%46 -3.44 -31.60 5.68 3.44 31.60 -5.68 0.004%47 -5.77 -31.60 3.38 5.77 31.60 -3.38 0.004%48 -6.56 -31.60 0.18 6.56 31.60 -0.18 0.004%49 -5.59 -31.60 -3.06 5.59 31.60 3.06 0.004%

Page 21: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 20

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

LoadComb.

Sum of Applied Forces Sum of Reactions% ErrorPX

KPYK

PZK

PXK

PYK

PZK

50 -3.12 -31.60 -5.49 3.12 31.60 5.49 0.004%

Non-Linear Convergence Results

LoadCombination

Converged? Numberof Cycles

DisplacementTolerance

ForceTolerance

1 Yes 6 0.00000001 0.000009202 Yes 18 0.00010647 0.000140273 Yes 18 0.00006827 0.000106964 Yes 25 0.00000001 0.000085515 Yes 24 0.00000001 0.000100766 Yes 25 0.00000001 0.000089257 Yes 24 0.00000001 0.000105378 Yes 20 0.00003296 0.000107989 Yes 19 0.00003753 0.00013756

10 Yes 25 0.00000001 0.0000829111 Yes 24 0.00000001 0.0000983912 Yes 24 0.00000001 0.0001499613 Yes 24 0.00000001 0.0000970614 Yes 20 0.00003289 0.0001483815 Yes 20 0.00002035 0.0001055116 Yes 25 0.00000001 0.0000902517 Yes 24 0.00000001 0.0001066918 Yes 25 0.00000001 0.0000852319 Yes 24 0.00000001 0.0001004220 Yes 19 0.00005955 0.0000860421 Yes 18 0.00006853 0.0001125122 Yes 25 0.00000001 0.0000830723 Yes 24 0.00000001 0.0000984124 Yes 25 0.00000001 0.0000854925 Yes 24 0.00000001 0.0001013826 Yes 15 0.00000001 0.0000158027 Yes 21 0.00011129 0.0000244428 Yes 21 0.00011076 0.0000592229 Yes 21 0.00011057 0.0000654030 Yes 21 0.00011086 0.0000223331 Yes 21 0.00011063 0.0000561832 Yes 21 0.00011064 0.0000531433 Yes 21 0.00011085 0.0000246634 Yes 21 0.00011045 0.0000647935 Yes 21 0.00011051 0.0000578736 Yes 21 0.00011102 0.0000222437 Yes 21 0.00011095 0.0000607938 Yes 21 0.00011108 0.0000651339 Yes 18 0.00009521 0.0000466640 Yes 18 0.00009468 0.0000944141 Yes 18 0.00009461 0.0001157442 Yes 18 0.00009506 0.0000450243 Yes 18 0.00009483 0.0000959344 Yes 18 0.00009487 0.0000882145 Yes 18 0.00009514 0.0000497846 Yes 18 0.00009463 0.0001183047 Yes 18 0.00009460 0.0000940148 Yes 18 0.00009508 0.0000434949 Yes 18 0.00009487 0.0000971250 Yes 18 0.00009494 0.00010788

Maximum Tower Deflections - Service Wind

SectionNo.

Elevation

ft

Horz.Deflection

in

Gov.Load

Comb.

Tilt

°

Twist

°

L1 150.75 - 124.25 44.49 40 2.928 0.018

Page 22: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 21

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

SectionNo.

Elevation

ft

Horz.Deflection

in

Gov.Load

Comb.

Tilt

°

Twist

°

L2 127 - 82.5 30.77 40 2.491 0.008L3 86.25 - 40.67 13.40 47 1.541 0.003L4 45.42 - 0 3.60 47 0.733 0.001

Critical Deflections and Radius of Curvature - Service Wind

Elevation

ft

Appurtenance Gov.Load

Comb.

Deflection

in

Tilt

°

Twist

°

Radius ofCurvature

ft

151.00 DB810M-XC 40 44.49 2.928 0.018 9982136.00 (4) QS8658-2 40 35.77 2.667 0.011 338390.50 18''Ø Stadium Lights 47 14.84 1.639 0.004 269388.00 18''Ø Stadium Lights 47 13.98 1.581 0.003 274185.50 18''Ø Stadium Lights 47 13.15 1.523 0.003 2770

Maximum Tower Deflections - Design Wind

SectionNo.

Elevation

ft

Horz.Deflection

in

Gov.Load

Comb.

Tilt

°

Twist

°

L1 150.75 - 124.25 178.76 4 11.811 0.079L2 127 - 82.5 124.00 4 10.053 0.037L3 86.25 - 40.67 54.21 18 6.238 0.015L4 45.42 - 0 14.59 18 2.972 0.004

Critical Deflections and Radius of Curvature - Design Wind

Elevation

ft

Appurtenance Gov.Load

Comb.

Deflection

in

Tilt

°

Twist

°

Radius ofCurvature

ft

151.00 DB810M-XC 4 178.76 11.811 0.079 2692136.00 (4) QS8658-2 4 143.96 10.760 0.048 90990.50 18''Ø Stadium Lights 18 60.01 6.635 0.016 68588.00 18''Ø Stadium Lights 18 56.56 6.400 0.015 69585.50 18''Ø Stadium Lights 18 53.22 6.170 0.015 701

Compression Checks

Pole Design Data

SectionNo.

Elevation

ft

Size L

ft

Lu

ft

Kl/r A

in2

Pu

K

Pn

K

RatioPu

Pn

L1 150.75 -124.25 (1)

TP21.27x14.18x0.1875 26.50 0.00 0.0 12.1089

-6.91 820.95 0.008

L2 124.25 - 82.5(2)

TP29.77x20.1592x0.3125 44.50 0.00 0.0 28.4148

-14.18 1948.69 0.007

L3 82.5 - 40.67(3)

TP37.57x28.3351x0.375 45.58 0.00 0.0 43.1259

-23.94 2957.57 0.008

L4 40.67 - 0 (4) TP43.24x35.8576x0.4375 45.42 0.00 0.0 59.4366

-37.89 4076.16 0.009

Page 23: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 22

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Pole Bending Design Data

SectionNo.

Elevation

ft

Size Mux

kip-ft

Mnx

kip-ft

RatioMux

Mnx

Muy

kip-ft

Mny

kip-ft

RatioMuy

Mny

L1 150.75 -124.25 (1)

TP21.27x14.18x0.1875 272.49 343.02 0.794 0.00 343.02 0.000

L2 124.25 - 82.5(2)

TP29.77x20.1592x0.3125 1010.87 1144.49 0.883 0.00 1144.49 0.000

L3 82.5 - 40.67(3)

TP37.57x28.3351x0.375 1971.07 2198.14 0.897 0.00 2198.14 0.000

L4 40.67 - 0 (4) TP43.24x35.8576x0.4375 3158.50 3579.29 0.882 0.00 3579.29 0.000

Pole Shear Design Data

SectionNo.

Elevation

ft

Size ActualVu

K

Vn

K

RatioVu

Vn

ActualTu

kip-ft

Tn

kip-ft

RatioTu

Tn

L1 150.75 -124.25 (1)

TP21.27x14.18x0.1875 16.75 410.48 0.041 1.57 686.88 0.002

L2 124.25 - 82.5(2)

TP29.77x20.1592x0.3125 20.81 974.35 0.021 2.53 2291.78 0.001

L3 82.5 - 40.67(3)

TP37.57x28.3351x0.375 25.04 1478.79 0.017 2.04 4401.66 0.000

L4 40.67 - 0 (4) TP43.24x35.8576x0.4375 26.98 2038.08 0.013 2.03 7167.33 0.000

Pole Interaction Design Data

SectionNo.

Elevation

ft

RatioPu

Pn

RatioMux

Mnx

RatioMuy

Mny

RatioVu

Vn

RatioTu

Tn

Comb.StressRatio

Allow.StressRatio

Criteria

L1 150.75 -124.25 (1)

0.008 0.794 0.000 0.041 0.002 0.805 1.0004.8.2

L2 124.25 - 82.5(2)

0.007 0.883 0.000 0.021 0.001 0.891 1.0004.8.2

L3 82.5 - 40.67(3)

0.008 0.897 0.000 0.017 0.000 0.905 1.0004.8.2

L4 40.67 - 0 (4) 0.009 0.882 0.000 0.013 0.000 0.892 1.0004.8.2

Section Capacity Table

SectionNo.

Elevationft

ComponentType

Size CriticalElement

PK

øPallow

K%

CapacityPassFail

L1 150.75 - 124.25 Pole TP21.27x14.18x0.1875 1 -6.91 820.95 80.5 PassL2 124.25 - 82.5 Pole TP29.77x20.1592x0.3125 2 -14.18 1948.69 89.1 PassL3 82.5 - 40.67 Pole TP37.57x28.3351x0.375 3 -23.94 2957.57 90.5 PassL4 40.67 - 0 Pole TP43.24x35.8576x0.4375 4 -37.89 4076.16 89.2 Pass

SummaryPole (L3) 90.5 Pass

RATING = 90.5 Pass

Page 24: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 23

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

APPENDIX B

BASE LEVEL DRAWING

Page 25: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 24

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

Page 26: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

May 10, 2016150.75 Ft Monopole Tower Structural Analysis CCI BU No 826150Project Number 37516-1466.001.7805, Application 345244, Revision 0 Page 25

tnxTower Report - version 7.0.5.1

APPENDIX C

ADDITIONAL CALCULATIONS

Page 27: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

Paul J. Ford and Company250 E. Broad Street, Suite 600

Columbus, OH 43215Phone: 614.221.6679FAX: 614.448.4105

Job:150.75 ft Monopole / N Riverside / Dublin HS

Project: PJF 37516-1466 / BU 826150Client: Crown Castle Drawn by: Joey Meinerding App'd:

Code: TIA-222-G Date: 05/10/16 Scale: NTSPath:

T:\375_Crown_Castle\2016\37516-1466_826150_N. Riverside - Dublin H\37516-1466.001.7805_SA_1233620\37516-1466.001.7805.eri

Dwg No. E-1

150.8 ft

124.3 ft

82.5 ft

40.7 ft

0.0 ft

REACTIONS - 90 mph WINDTORQUE 3 kip-ft

27 KSHEAR

3158 kip-ftMOMENT

38 KAXIAL

40 mph WIND - 0.7500 in ICETORQUE 1 kip-ft

6 KSHEAR

714 kip-ftMOMENT

61 KAXIAL

ARE FACTOREDALL REACTIONS

Sect

ion

12

34

Length

(ft)

26.5

044.5

045.5

845.4

2

Num

ber

of

Sid

es

18

18

18

18

Thic

kness

(in)

0.1

875

0.3

125

0.3

750

0.4

375

Sock

et

Length

(ft)

2.7

53.7

54.7

5

Top

Dia

(in)

14.1

800

20.1

592

28.3

351

35.8

576

Bot

Dia

(in)

21.2

700

29.7

700

37.5

700

43.2

400

Gra

de

A572-6

0

Weig

ht

(K)

0.9

3.7

6.0

8.4

19.1

DB810M-XC 151DB810M-XC 151TTPA-8626 151(2) CMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6 w/ Mount Pipe 151(2) CMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6 w/ Mount Pipe 151(2) CMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6 w/ Mount Pipe 151FXFB 151FXFB 151FXFB 151FRIG 151FRIG 151FRIG 151DC4-48-60-8-20F 151DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/ Mount Pipe 151DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/ Mount Pipe 151DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/ Mount Pipe 151FRLB 151FRLB 151FRLB 1512.375" OD x 5' Mount Pipe 1512.375" OD x 5' Mount Pipe 1512.375" OD x 5' Mount Pipe 1518-ft Ladder 151Side Arm Mount [SO 702-1] 151Platform Mount [LP 601-1] 151(4) QS8658-2 136(4) QS8658-2 136(4) QS8658-2 136RRH2X60-850 (3GPP BAND 5) 136RRH2X60-850 (3GPP BAND 5) 136RRH2X60-850 (3GPP BAND 5) 136RRH2X40-07-U 136RRH2X40-07-U 136RRH2X40-07-U 136(3) RRH2X60-AWS BAND 4-RW/BRACKET

136(3) RRH4x30 136(2) RCMDC-3315-PF-48 136RCMDC-3315-PF-48 136Platform Mount [LP 301-1] 13618"Ø Stadium Lights 90.518"Ø Stadium Lights 90.518"Ø Stadium Lights 90.518"Ø Stadium Lights 90.518"Ø Stadium Lights 90.518"Ø Stadium Lights 90.518"Ø Stadium Lights 90.5T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1] 90.518"Ø Stadium Lights 8818"Ø Stadium Lights 8818"Ø Stadium Lights 8818"Ø Stadium Lights 8818"Ø Stadium Lights 8818"Ø Stadium Lights 8818"Ø Stadium Lights 88T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1] 8818"Ø Stadium Lights 85.518"Ø Stadium Lights 85.518"Ø Stadium Lights 85.518"Ø Stadium Lights 85.518"Ø Stadium Lights 85.518"Ø Stadium Lights 85.518"Ø Stadium Lights 85.5T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1] 85.5DESIGNED APPURTENANCE LOADING

TYPE TYPEELEVATION ELEVATIONDB810M-XC 151

DB810M-XC 151

TTPA-8626 151

(2) CMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6 w/ Mount Pipe 151

(2) CMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6 w/ Mount Pipe 151

(2) CMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6 w/ Mount Pipe 151

FXFB 151

FXFB 151

FXFB 151

FRIG 151

FRIG 151

FRIG 151

DC4-48-60-8-20F 151

DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/ Mount Pipe 151

DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/ Mount Pipe 151

DBXNH-6565B-A2M w/ Mount Pipe 151

FRLB 151

FRLB 151

FRLB 151

2.375" OD x 5' Mount Pipe 151

2.375" OD x 5' Mount Pipe 151

2.375" OD x 5' Mount Pipe 151

8-ft Ladder 151

Side Arm Mount [SO 702-1] 151

Platform Mount [LP 601-1] 151

(4) QS8658-2 136

(4) QS8658-2 136

(4) QS8658-2 136

RRH2X60-850 (3GPP BAND 5) 136

RRH2X60-850 (3GPP BAND 5) 136

RRH2X60-850 (3GPP BAND 5) 136

RRH2X40-07-U 136

RRH2X40-07-U 136

RRH2X40-07-U 136

(3) RRH2X60-AWS BAND 4-RW/BRACKET

136

(3) RRH4x30 136

(2) RCMDC-3315-PF-48 136

RCMDC-3315-PF-48 136

Platform Mount [LP 301-1] 136

18"Ø Stadium Lights 90.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 90.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 90.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 90.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 90.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 90.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 90.5

T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1] 90.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 88

18"Ø Stadium Lights 88

18"Ø Stadium Lights 88

18"Ø Stadium Lights 88

18"Ø Stadium Lights 88

18"Ø Stadium Lights 88

18"Ø Stadium Lights 88

T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1] 88

18"Ø Stadium Lights 85.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 85.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 85.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 85.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 85.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 85.5

18"Ø Stadium Lights 85.5

T-Arm Mount [TA 602-1] 85.5

MATERIAL STRENGTHGRADE GRADEFy FyFu Fu

A572-60 60 ksi 75 ksi

TOWER DESIGN NOTES1. Tower is located in Franklin County, Ohio.2. Tower designed for Exposure C to the TIA-222-G Standard.3. Tower designed for a 90 mph basic wind in accordance with the TIA-222-G Standard.4. Tower is also designed for a 40 mph basic wind with 0.75 in ice. Ice is considered to increase in

thickness with height.5. Deflections are based upon a 60 mph wind.6. Tower Structure Class II.7. Topographic Category 1 with Crest Height of 0.00 ft8. TOWER RATING: 90.5%

Page 28: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

Date:

PJF Project:

Client Ref. #

Site Name:

Description:

Owner:

v4.4 - Effective 7-12-13 Engineer:

Moment = 3158 k-ft TIA Ref. G Location = Base Plate

Axial = 38.0 kips ASIF = 1.0000 η = 0.50 for BP, Rev. G Sect. 4.9.9

Shear = 27.0 kips Max Ratio = 105.0% Threads = N/A for FP, Rev. G

Anchor Qty = 15

Item

Nominal

Anchor Dia,

in Spec Fy, ksi Fu, ksi

Location,

degrees

Anchor

Circle, in

Area

Override,

in2 Area, in2

Max Net

Compressio

n, kips

Max Net

Tension,

kips

Load for

Capacity

Calc, kips

Capacity

Override,

kips

Capacity,

kips

Capacity

Ratio

1 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 15.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

2 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 45.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

3 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 75.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

4 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 105.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

5 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 135.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

6 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 165.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

7 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 195.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

8 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 225.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

9 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 255.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

10 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 285.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

11 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 315.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

12 2.250 #18J A615 Gr 75 75 100 345.0 50.62 0.00 3.98 196.47 191.40 200.07 0.00 260.00 76.9%

13 2.250 A193 Gr B7 105 125 0.0 54.24 0.00 3.98 210.13 205.07 213.73 0.00 325.00 65.8%

14 2.250 A193 Gr B7 105 125 120.0 54.24 0.00 3.98 210.13 205.07 213.73 0.00 325.00 65.8%

15 2.250 A193 Gr B7 105 125 240.0 54.24 0.00 3.98 210.13 205.07 213.73 0.00 325.00 65.8%

59.69

Asymmetric Anchor Rod Analysis

151' Pole

Crown Castle

JWM

** For Post Installed Anchors: Check anchors for embedment, epoxy/grout bond, and capacity based on proof load. **

5/10/2016

37516-1466.001.7805

826150

N. Riverside / Dublin HS

© Copyright 2011, Paul J. Ford and Company, all right reserved.

Page 29: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

TIA Rev G

Site Data

BU#: 2454.2 ft-kipsSite Name: 30.4 kips

App #: 21.6 kipsOther Eta Factor, η 0.5 TIA G (Fig. 4-4)

If No stiffeners, Criteria: AISC LRFD <-Only Applcable to Unstiffened Cases

Qty: 12Diam: 2.25 in

Rod Material: A615-J Anchor Rod Results RigidStrength (Fu): 100 ksi Max Rod (Cu+ Vu/ή): 200.1 Kips AISC LRFD

Yield (Fy): 75 ksi Allowable Axial, Φ*Fu*Anet: 260.0 Kips φ*Tn

Bolt Circle: 50.62 in Anchor Rod Stress Ratio: 76.9% Pass

Diam: 58 in Base Plate Results Flexural Check RigidThick: 2 in Base Plate Stress: 40.8 ksi AISC LRFD

Grade: 50 ksi Allowable Plate Stress: 45.0 ksi φ*Fy

Single-Rod B-eff: 11.44 in Base Plate Stress Ratio: 90.7% Pass Y.L. Length:

26.32

n/a

Config: 0 * Stiffener ResultsWeld Type: Horizontal Weld : n/a

Groove Depth: in ** Vertical Weld: n/aGroove Angle: degrees Plate Flex+Shear, fb/Fb+(fv/Fv)^2: n/aFillet H. Weld: <-- Disregard Plate Tension+Shear, ft/Ft+(fv/Fv)^2:n/aFillet V. Weld: in Plate Comp. (AISC Bracket): n/a

Width: inHeight: in Pole ResultsThick: in Pole Punching Shear Check: n/aNotch: inGrade: ksi

Weld str.: ksi

Diam: 43.24 inThick: 0.4375 in

Grade: 65 ksi# of Sides: 18 "0" IF Round

Fu 80 ksiReinf. Fillet Weld 0 "0" if None

* 0 = none, 1 = every bolt, 2 = every 2 bolts, 3 = 2 per bolt

** Note: for complete joint penetration groove welds the groove depth must be exactly 1/2 the stiffener thickness for calculation purposes

Stiffener Data (Welding at both sides)

826150 Mu:Axial, Pu:

Shear, Vu:

N Riverside / Dublin HS

Pole Manufacturer:

Assumption: Clear space between bottom of leveling nut and top of concrete not exceeding (1)*(Rod Diameter)

Stiffened or Unstiffened, Ungrouted, Circular Base Plate - Any Rod Material

Pole Data

Anchor Rod Data

Plate Data

Reactions

Reactions adjusted toaccount for additionalanchor rods.

CCIplate 1.5 - Circular Base G 1.3, Effective March 19, 2012 Analysis Date: 5/10/2016

Page 30: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

Job Number: 37516-1466.001.7805 Page: 1

Site Number: 826150 By: JWM

Site Name: N Riverside / Dublin HS Date: 5/10/2016

Factored Base Reactions from RISA Safety Factors / Load Factors / Φ FactorsComp. (+) Tension (-) Tower Type = Monopole DP

Moment, Mu = 3158.0 k-ft ACI Code = ACI 318-05

Shear, Vu = 27.0 kips Seismic Design Category = D

Axial Load, Pu1 = 38.0 kips (from 1.2D + 1.6W)* Reference Standard = TIA-222-G

Axial Load, Pu2 = 28.5 0.0 kips (from 0.9D + 1.6W)** Use 1.3 Load Factor? No

OTMu = 3185.0 0.0 k-ft @ Ground Load Factor = 1.00*Axial Load, Pu1 will be used for Soil Compression Analysis.

**Axial Load, Pu2 will be used for Steel Analysis.

Drilled Pier Parameters Safety Factor Φ Factor

Diameter = 6 ft Soil Lateral Resistance = 2.00 0.75

Height Above Grade = 1 ft Skin Friction = 2.00 0.75

Depth Below Grade = 17 ft End Bearing = 2.00 0.75

fc' = 3 ksi Concrete Wt. Resist Uplift = 1.25

εc = 0.003 in/in

L / D Ratio = 3.00 Load Combinations Checked per TIA-222-G1. (0.75) Ult. Skin Friction + (0.75) Ult. End Bearing

Mat Ftdn. Cap Width = 11 ft + (1.2) Effective Soil Wt. - (1.2) Buoyant Conc. Wt. ≥ Comp.

Mat Ftdn. Cap Length = 11 ft 2. (0.75) Ult. Skin Friction + (0.9) Buoyant Conc. Wt. ≥ Uplift

Depth Below Grade = 5 ft

Steel Parameters Soil ParametersNumber of Bars = 18 Water Table Depth = 23.00 ft

Rebar Size = #11 Depth to Ignore Soil = 3.33 ft

Rebar Fy = 60 ksi Depth to Full Cohesion = 0 ftRebar MOE = 29000 ksi Full Cohesion Starts at?* Ground

Tie Size = #4 Above Full Cohesion Lateral Resistance = 4(Cohesion)(Dia)(H)

Side Clear Cover to Ties = 6 in Below Full Cohesion Lateral Resistance = 8(Cohesion)(Dia)(H)

Direct Embed Pole Shaft Parameters Maximum Capacity RatiosDia @ Grade = in Maximum Soil Ratio = 110.0%

Dia @ Depth Below Grade = in Maximum Steel Ratio = 105.0%

Number of Sides =

Thickness = in

Fy = ksi

Backfill Condition =

Define Soil LayersNote: Cohesion = Undrained Shear Strengh = Unconfined Compressive Strength / 2

Friction Ultimate Comp. Ult. Tension Ult.

Thickness Unit Weight Cohesion Angle End Bearing Skin Friction Skin Friction Depth

Layer ft pcf psf degrees Soil Type psf psf psf ft

1 2 120 0 0 Clay 2

2 11 120 1700 0 Clay 9000 13

3 7 120 2250 0 Clay 12000 20

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Soil Results: OverturningDepth to COR = 10.36 ft, from Grade Shear, Vu = 27.00 kips

Bending Moment, Mu = 3464.60 k-ft, from COR Resisting Shear, ΦVn = 29.27 kips

Resisting Moment, ΦMn = 3756.40 k-ft, from COR

Soil Results: Uplift Soil Results: CompressionUplift, Tu = 0.00 kips Compression, Cu = 38.00 kips

Uplift Capacity, ΦTn = 143.81 kips Comp. Capacity, ΦCn = 824.59 kips

Steel Results (ACI 318-05):Minimum Steel Area = 13.57 sq in Axial Load, Pu = 26.44 kips @ 5.00 ft Below Grade

Actual Steel Area = 28.08 sq in Moment, Mu = 3175.70 k-ft @ 5.00 ft Below Grade

Moment, ΦMn = 3568.97 k-ft

Axial, ΦPn (min) = -1516.32 kips, Where ΦMn = 0 k-ft

Axial, ΦPn (max) = 6237.68 kips, Where ΦMn = 0 k-ftMOMENT RATIO = 89.0% OK

OKCOMPRESSION RATIO = 4.6%

DRILLED PIER SOIL AND STEEL ANALYSIS - TIA-222-G

SHEAR RATIO = 92.2% OKMOMENT RATIO = 92.2% OK

*Note: The drilled pier foundation was analyzed using the methodology in the software ‘PLS-

Caisson’ (Version 8.10, or newer, by Power Line Systems, Inc.). Per the methods in PLS-

Caisson, the soil reactions of cohesive soils are calculated using 8CD independent of the

depth of the soil layer. The depth of soil to be ignored at the top of the drilled pier is based

the recommendations of the site specific geotechnical report. In the absence of any

recommendations, the frost depth at the site or one half of the drilled pier diameter

(whichever is greater) shall be ignored.

UPLIFT RATIO = 0.0% OK

v4.3 - Effective: 03-14-16 (c) Copyright 2016 by Paul J. Ford and Company, all rights reserved.

Page 31: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance

Site Data

BU#: GSite Name: 3175.7 ft-kips (* Note)

App #: 26.44 kipsComp.

For M (WL) 1 <----Disregard

For P (DL) 1 <----Disregard Load Factor

1.00 Mu: 3175.7 ft-kips1.00 Pu: 26.44 kips

Concrete:6.0 ft

4071.5 in23000 psi60 ksi

Reinforcement: 29000 ksi6.00 in 0.00207

Horiz. Tie Bar Size= 4 0.0034.80 ft57.59 in 2005

111.41 in D

1.56 in2Seismic Risk = High

18

As Total= 28.08 in2Solve <-- Press Upon Completing All Input

A s/ Aconc, Rho: 0.0069 0.69% (Run)

ACI 10.5 , ACI 21.10.4, and IBC 1810. Results:Min As for Flexural, Tension Controlled, Shafts: Governing Orientation Case: 2

(3)*(Sqrt(f'c)/Fy: 0.0027200 / Fy: 0.0033

Dist. From Edge to Neutral Axis: 13.59 inExtreme Steel Strain, єt: 0.0112

Minimum Rho Check:Actual Req'd Min. Rho: 0.33% Flexural Reduction Factor,φ: 0.900

Provided Rho: 0.69% OK

Ref. Shaft Max Axial Capacities, φ Max(Pn or Tn):

Output Note: Negative Pu=Tension

6237.68 kips For Axial Compression, φ Pn = Pu: 26.44 kips3154.82 ft-kips Drilled Shaft Moment Capacity, φMn: 3568.98 ft-kips

Drilled Shaft Superimposed Mu: 3175.70 ft-kips1516.32 kips

0.00 ft-kips 89.0%

Case 1 Case 2

Limiting compressive strain =

Vertical Bar Size = Seismic PropertiesBar Diameter =

Material Properties

Number of Bars =

Vert. Cage Diameter =

Max Tu, (φ=0.9) Tn =at Mu=φ=(0.90)Mn=

at Mu=(φ=0.65)Mn=

Max Pu = (φ=0.65) Pn. Pn per ACI 318 (10-2)

(Mu/φMn, Drilled Shaft Flexure CSR:

єt > 0.0050, Tension Controlled

Seismic Design Category =

Vert. Cage Diameter =

Loads Already Factored

Shaft Factored Loads

Bar Area =

Pier Properties

Pier Diameter =

Concrete Comp. strength, f'c =

Reinforcement yield strength, Fy =

Concrete Area =

Moment Capacity of Drilled Concrete Shaft (Caisson) for TIA Rev F or G

TIA Revision:Max. Factored Shaft Mu:

Max. Factored Shaft Pu:

Maximum Shaft Superimposed Forces

Max Axial Force Type:

ACI 318 CodeSelect Analysis ACI Code=

Note: Shaft assumed to have ties, not spiral, transverse reinforcing

Reinforcing Modulus of Elasticity, E =

Reinforcement yield strain =

826150N Riverside / Dublin HS

(*) Note: Max Shaft Superimposed Moment does not necessarily

equal to the shaft top reaction moment

Clear Cover to Tie=

Mu Mu

EQ EQ

Drilled_Shaft_Moment_Capacity, DSMC, Version 1.1 - Effective 04/01/ 2010 Analysis Date: 5/10/2016

Page 32: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance
Page 33: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance
Page 34: Datedublinohiousa.gov/dev/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/16-046... · Date: May 10, 2016 Thomas Simpkins Paul J. Ford and Company ... The analysis has been performed in accordance